Research and management challenges following soil and landscape decontamination at the onset of the reopening of the Difficult-to-Return Zone, Fukushima (Japan)

Evrard, Olivier; Chalaux-Clergue, Thomas; Chaboche, Pierre-Alexis; Wakiyama, Yoshifumi; Thiry, Yves

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-479-2023

Articles | Volume 9, issue 2

https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-479-2023

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-479-2023

© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 9, issue 2

Review article

|

06 Sep 2023

Review article |

| 06 Sep 2023

Research and management challenges following soil and landscape decontamination at the onset of the reopening of the Difficult-to-Return Zone, Fukushima (Japan)

Olivier Evrard, Thomas Chalaux-Clergue, Pierre-Alexis Chaboche, Yoshifumi Wakiyama, and Yves Thiry

Download

Final revised paper (published on 06 Sep 2023)
Preprint (discussion started on 08 May 2023)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-743', Anonymous Referee #1, 23 May 2023

This is a really excellent holistic synthesis of the decontamination carried out in Fukushima areas. The synthesis is comprehensive, balanced, and insightful. This study will be a key literature that tells us about the decontamination measures taken in Fukushima and their impact/consequences.

General comment:
Scope Agreed?
I believe the content of this manuscript is within the scope of SOIL; however, I feel that the manuscript should probably be a bit more SOIL-centric context, by at least inserting some texts explaining why soil matters and plays a key role in the decontamination in the radioactive contamination problem, also in the abstract, purpose and conclusion, if possible, in the main text as well. No need to change the structure of the manuscript.

Specific comments:
“Japanese characters”
The use of Japanese characters for some keywords is very unique. I like it. Probably, to accurately translate (convey) the key terms. Right?

Line 65-67 (Lyons et al., 2020): typo
Too many (Lyons et al., 2020)s.

Line 181, 799, “Fukushima Reprun”
Probably “Reprun Fukushima” would be correct.

Line 163 Board of Audit of Japan （会計検査院）
I don’t understand why you emphasize this by with Japanese characters.

Line 187 Clean Centre (クリーンセンター)
I don’t understand why you emphasize this by with Japanese characters.

Line 354: The Japanese characters here.
These two Japanese characters mean “debris”. The correct one is shown in line 790.

Line 440: “fuel break”
This term would be new for readers of SOIL. Add an explanation or rephrase it.

Line 567 “salmon”
I am not a specialist of fish, but “salmon” sounds like a sea fish. Is this correct?

References still need to be refined in terms of format. (137)Cs, for example. Please check them again.

Finally, again, I thank the authors for this excellent synthesis.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-743-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Olivier Evrard, 02 Jul 2023
  
  We would like to thank the reviewer for his/her encouraging comments and for these suggestions that we will carefully take into account to revise the manuscript, should the editor give us this possibility.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-743-AC1
RC2:
'Comment on egusphere-2023-743', Anonymous Referee #2, 01 Jul 2023

## General comments

This review, which aims to inform the rest of the world about the unparalleled and proactive contamination measures taken by Japan, will be of great value as a preparation for future nuclear disasters.

While many of the materials are written only in Japanese, I believe that the situation is adequately grasped and the necessary information is widely presented.

However, there are a few points that could be improved before publication.

Although the authors state that they do not deal with caesium migration (L129), the first half of Section 5 is mainly about caesium migration, which is contradictory.

Rather, as it relates to the theme of this review, it is necessary to consider the resumption of agriculture and forestry and their social and economic impact.

For example, two discussions by Kimura on the forestry economics impact of the accident would be helpful. (Unfortunately, it is in Japanese.)

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jjfs/103/1/103_13/_pdf/-char/ja

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jjfs/105/3/105_96/_pdf/-char/ja

From the number of citations, it would be inferred that a significant part of the description of forest impacts and measures relies on information from a book of Hashimoto et al. (2022).

Presumably there are similarly reviews of other sections (e.g. in the agricultural section) that the authors have referred to.

Therefore, not only a review of caesium migration (Table 1) but also a review of the social impact of caesium contamination in each landscape should be listed.

## specific comments

L65 (Lyons et al. 2020) -> ICRP citation is appropriate here.

Section on agricultural land (L228-272)

Measures, additional contamination and current situation of transfer factor in agricultural landscapes are well reviewed.

However, an explanation of the resulting actual concentrations in crops and the evolution of shipping restrictions would be essential.

L328 It should be mentioned that there are no restrictions on its use as a building material.

L348 Girdling is certainly worth trying as a means of reducing concentrations and increasing timber utilization.

However, it should be noted that it is not expected to be a solution, given the additional costs involved in Japan's difficult forestry management situation and the fact that pollution of cedar and other building materials is not a major problem.

As mentioned in the general comments, priority will be given to pointing out issues related to the forestry economy, etc.

L354 Confirmation on Japanese language errors. "瓦礫" -> "板葺".

Table 2 “Sawdust for mushroom cultivation” -> “Sawdust medium for mushroom cultivation”

L403 It should be mentioned that wood-logs have more stringent standards than sawdust and that the concentration of sawdust can be adjusted by changing the formulation.

L411 Kobayashi -> Kanasashi et al 2020

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0265931X19307374

L417 It is unclear which parts are distinguished as (i) and (ii)

L445 Hashimoto et al. state that the reason for the increase in wild boar and deer populations is not solely due to a decrease in the number of hunters (capture pressure).

Fig. 6.14 in Hashimoto et al. shows that the number of captures has increased in line with the decrease in the number of hunters.

Although the graph does not show the number of individuals, it should be understood that the estimated number of individuals has increased as well, and that the increase in the number of individuals has exceeded the pressure of captures.

The 137th reference cited in Hashimoto et al. has been revised and the content changed, but previous versions can be downloaded from the following link.

https://www.env.go.jp/nature/choju/plan/plan3-2a/chpt2.pdf (Japanese)

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-743-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Olivier Evrard, 02 Jul 2023
  
  We would like to thank the reviewer for his/her encouraging comments and for these suggestions that we will carefully take into account to revise the manuscript, should the editor give us this possibility.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-743-AC2

Peer review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision | EF: Editorial file upload

ED: Revision (03 Jul 2023) by Rafael Clemente

AR by Olivier Evrard on behalf of the Authors (04 Jul 2023) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (06 Jul 2023) by Rafael Clemente

ED: Publish as is (02 Aug 2023) by Engracia Madejón Rodríguez (Executive editor)

AR by Olivier Evrard on behalf of the Authors (02 Aug 2023)

Short summary

Twelve years after the nuclear accident that occurred in Fukushima in March 2011, radioactive contamination remains a major concern in north-eastern Japan. The Japanese authorities completed an unprecedented decontamination programme. The central objective was to not expose local inhabitants to excessive radioactive doses. At the onset of the full reopening of the Difficult-to-Return Zone in 2023, the current review provides an update of a previous synthesis published in 2019.